Showing results 1-1 of 1.

Cases using phrasing similar to:
"As noted by Professor Giannelli, supra, at 1235 (footnotes omitted): "The probative value of scientific evidence,..., is connected inextricably to its reliability; if the technique is not reliable, evidence derived from the technique is not relevant.""

  Hawthorne v. State - FL

Decided: 6/7/1985

Hawthorne II, following Ibn-Tamas I, which in turn followed Dyas v. United States, 376 A.2d 827 (D.C.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 973, 98 S.Ct. 529, 54 L.Ed.2d 464 (1977), applied a three-fold test for determining the admissibility of expert testimony relating to the subject of the battered woman syndrome: (1) Whether the expert is qualified to give an opinion on the subject matter;[2] (2) whether the state of the art of scientific knowledge permits a reasonable opinion to be given by the expert;[3] and (3) whether the subject matter of the expert opinion is so related to some science, profession, business or occupation as to be beyond the understanding of the average layman.[4] ... The court's decision to disallow Dr. Walker's testimony was the same as that reached by the trial court after remand in Ibn-Tamas v. United States, 455 A.2d 893 779*779 (D.C. 1983) (Ibn-Tamas II). Ibn-Tamas II upheld, as a proper exercise of the trial court's discretion, the conclusion "`that defendant failed to establish a general acceptance by the expert's colleagues of the methodology used in the expert's study of battered women.'"

Cited 12 times